Umm, but this defeats the entire point of the forward position and gives up both flanks to him? Would this not mean your plan failed, since you dealt no real damage to him and were forced to retreat to the initial position? This would be giving him exactly what he wants, the opportunity to march up, secure his flanks and start bombarding our position at Medium range.Ok, but how would I actually do to win the battle? I would retreat to our main position, which is functionally immune against long-ranged fire. If he doesn't give us the battle we desire, we don't give him his.
You have no counterplay against him moving there on T2, Rotholz isn't even set up yet.
Them ending up in melee would require us to make a mistake, clearly. With Ready Fire, Ready Move as an option and Elven cavalry support for spotting and deterring aggressive enemy actions, I have done all I can to minimize risks for our skirmishers. I also fail to see your point since you are moving the halflings pretty much identically to me, with no cavalry support.Right, you do not intend for them to get in a melee. What happens if they do? Due to Trotha being less risk averse against them or just making a blundering move.
My answer to you was that I do not consider this a bad outcome. If he splits his forces and sends some to Sarnscheid and some to Rotholz, we get a close-range firefight/brawl at Rotholz, which favors us. This is not a bad outcome.I have outlined countermove against your main plans (put some artillery onto the Sarnscheid to surpress our movement, take a forward position around the stronghold). You have called the first plausible. So, what happens if they do this and half your plan for gaining an advantage against the melee falls apart?
You have no counterplay against him moving there on T2, Rotholz isn't even set up yet.
We can also pressure the Sarnscheid position with our halflings in the West, unless he devotes even more resources to guard that approach. This stretches his forces thinly.
What? I do not understand what you are talking about? I am proposing no such thing, the cavalry and horse artillery is already present on the East flank to support in my plan! There is a safe route through the Eastern hills to Rotholz he cannot fire artillery at. Did you get muxed up about West vs East here? To clarify: I intend to defend the East much more than the West, in the West the halflings retreat while firing if met with a serious threat. The geography in the West is such that that flank is no real threat to us, we can always fall back there and defend the hills. In the East is where we should fight harder and longer before retreating.In this case, you are proposing a march through enemy medium artillery fire to reinforce a position of skirmishers, which are there to deal damage so we have the upper hand during melee. I think this idea is backwards, exposing our force to significant damage rather than damaging his. If we forgo the initiative here, there is a decent risk we can flat out never move our own infantry onto the central plain for fear of risk.
I am completely fine not moving our infantry onto the central plain. My whole idea is to defend the flanks! The central plain is death against an enemy with artillery superiority.If we forgo the initiative here, there is a decent risk we can flat out never move our own infantry onto the central plain for fear of risk.
The only scenario in which I would move in the center is the one in which he sends too many forces to take either flank and exposes his center. But that would require a major mistake from him.
Last edited: